Prahlad S/O Baburao Samarth v. Union Of India, Thr. Secretary, Ministry Of Information And Technology, New Delhi And Others

1 41.wp.3500.22.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.

3500/2022 Prahlad s/o. Baburao Samarth Vs. Union of India and Ors. ................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order or directions and Registrar's orders ................................................................................................................................................... Mr. A. K. Waghmare, Advocate for Petitioner.

Mr. C. J. Dhumne, Advocate for Respondent 1.

Mr. A. S. Deshpande, Advocate for Respondent 3. CORAM :

ROHIT B. DEO AND MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.

DATED :

03.04.2023 .

We may record the submission canvassed by the learned Counsel for the petitioner Mr. Waghmare that the learned Counsel for the petitioner did request the learned Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal) for time to file rejoinder to the affidavit in response filed on behalf of the non-applicant/s, and further the learned Counsel for the petitioner requested the Tribunal to await the decision in the perjury proceedings.

2.

While we are not required to make any observation on the second part of the submission, as regards the first part, if according to the petitioner, his Counsel did make a request for grant of time to file affidavit in response and such request is not recorded in the order impugned, in view of the settled law, it would be more appropriate if the petitioner approaches the learned Central Administrative Tribunal with an appropriate application.

2 41.wp.3500.22.odt 3.

We are disposing of this petition with liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate steps in law.

(MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (ROHIT B. DEO, J.) RGurnule MANOJ MANDADE 15:05